RETHINKING OF RIGHTS AND PROCEDURAL COMPLEXITY IN TRANSFER OF SHARE: A REVIEW UNDER COMPANY LAW IN BANGLADESH

  • Zahid RAFIQUE Department of Law, Prime University, Bangladesh

Abstract

This paper unveils the pen-picture of rights in transfer of share and the pitfalls in that regard. In order to find out the pitfalls, the Companies Act 1994 in Bangladesh has been taken as the bedrock for analysis. Also, the Listing Regulation of Dhaka Stock Exchange Limited 1996 in Bangladesh has been applied to streamline the analytical issues. Various forms in transfer of share create a problem for transferor in Bangladesh. Indeed, the provisions of the Act are manufactured in such way that it throttles the rights of transferor. The confusion over rights in joint shareholding seems to put shareholders at stake owing to the inadequate legal support. Refusal in transfer of share is lamentably more emphasized in the Act than rights and the process of transfer in provision appears favoring the refusal rather than protecting the rights. All these have been critically extrapolated with the study over the relevant English, Indian and Pakistani laws to redress the balance in transfer of share in Bangladesh.

References

[1] Morse, Geoffrey. 1995. Charlesworth & Morse Company Law, London: Sweet & Maxwell, 1995.
[2] Davies, Paul L. 2008. Gower and Davies’ Principles of Modern Company Law, London: Sweet & Maxwell.
[3] Birds, John et al. 2007. Boyle & Birds’ Company Law, Bristol, Jordan Publishing Limited.
[4] Schmitthoff, Clive M. 1987. Palmer’s Company Law, London: Stevens & Sons.
[5] Pennington, Robert R. 1993. Company Law, London, Butterworths.
[6] Gower, L.C.B.; Cronin, J.B., and Easson, A.J. 1984. Gower’s Principles of Modern Company Law, London, Stevens & Sons.
[7] Al-Muktadir, Abul Khair. 2002. Muktadir’s All about Shares Management based on laws, rules and practice, Dhaka, Published by the Author.
[8] Zahir, M. 2005. Company and Securities Laws, Dhaka, The University Press Limited.
[9] Mahmood, SH Shaukat, and Shaukat, SH. Nadeem. 1990. Principles of Interpretation of Statutes with Genaral Clauses Act, 1987, Lahore, Legal Research Centre.
[10] Singh, Avtar. 2005. Introduction of Interpretation of Statutes, New Delhi, Wadhwa and Company, 131.
[11] Rajak, Harry. 1995. Sourcebook of Company Law, Bristol, Jordan Publishing Ltd, 598.
Cases
 International Credit and Investment Co.(overseas) Ltd. v. Adham [1994] 1 BCLC 66 cited in Morse. Company Law, 234.
 Weston’s Case (1868) L.R. 4 Ch. App. 20, C.A. cited in Gower, Company Law, 445.
 Borland’s Trustee v. Steel Bros &Co.Ltd. [1901] 1 Ch. 279 at 288 cited in Birds, Company Law, 259.
 Grant v. John Grant & Sons Pty Ltd.[1950] 82 CLR 129 cited in Zahir, Company Laws, 44.
 Niranjan Dey v. United Chemicals works Ltd.(1995) DlR (HCD) 423.
 Delavenne v. Broadhurst [1931] Ch. 234 cited in Morse, Company Law 261.
 Stewart v. James Keiller & Sons Ltd. (1902) 4 F. Cited in Morse, Company Law, 261.
 The Ocean Coal Co. Ltd. v. The Powell Duffryn Steam Coal Co. Ltd. [1932] 1 Ch. 654 cited in Morse, Company Law 261.
 Munro v. Bogie [1994] 1 BCLC 415 CS (O.H) cited in Morse, Company Law, 262.
 Howie v. Crawford [1990] BCC 330 cf. Re Bird Precision Bellows Ltd. [1986] Ch. 658 cited in Morse, Company Law, 283.
 Re ESC Publishing Ltd. [1990] BCC 325 cited in Morse, Company Law 283.
 Buckingham v. Francis [1986] BCLC 353 cited in I Morse, Company Law 283.
 Sutcliffe v. Thackrah [1974] A.C. 727 cited in Morse, Company Law, 283.
 Rameshar Prasad Lal v. Ghisiwan Prasad 51 A 820: 1929 A531:121 IC 241 cited in M. Monir, A Short Edition of Principle and Digest of the Law of Evidence Being A Commentary on the Law of Evidence Act (I of 1872), ed. H.S Ursekar (Allahabad, India: The University Book Agency, 1984) 473.
 Ram Dewan Shukul v. Ram Surat Shukul, 1929 A 589(l):117 IC 345, cited in Monir, Law of Evidence, 473.
 Jagan Nath Pershad v. Chandi Pershad, I Luck 68: 1927 O 86: 93 IC 640, cited in Monir, Law of Evidence, 473.
 Bhagat Ram v. Raghubar Dial, 1925 L 57:79 IC 132 cited in Monir, Law of Evidence, 473.
 Ram Dewan Shukul v. Ram Surat Shukul, 1929 A 589(1):117 AC 345 cited in Monir, Law of Evidence, 473.
 Bashira Bibi v. Sheikh Ata Ullah, 1929 A 423:118 IC 170 cited in Monir, Law of Evidence, 473.
 Todar Singh v. Thakur Kehri Singh, 50 IC 126 cited in Monir, Law of Evidence, p. 473 cited in Monir, Law of Evidence, 473.
 Mohammad Yamin v. Babu Ganesh Prasad Singh, 118 IC 226 cited in Monir, Law of Evidence, 473.
 Niranjan Dey v. United Chemical Works Ltd. (1995) DLR (HCD) 423.
 N.W. Transportation v. Beatty (1987) 12 App. Cas. 589 (P.C.) cited in Morse, Company Law, 391.
 Schmitthoff, Company Law, 522.
 M. Pentiah v. Muddala Veera Mallappa, AIR 1961 SC 1107, 11113, cited in Mahmudul Islam Interpretation of Statutes and Documents (Dhaka: Mullick Brothers, 2009), 241.
 Osman Gani v. Moinuddin, 27 DLR (AD) 61.
 Woodward v. Sarsons (1875) L.R. 10 C.p. 733, per Lord Coleridge C.J. at p. 746 cited in P.St. J. Langan, Maxwell on the Interpretation of Statutes (Bombay,: N.M. Tripathi Private Ltd, 2000) 314.
 Re Smith & Fawcett Ltd. [1942] Ch. 204, C.A., p. 306, cited in Gower, Company Law, 445.
 Charles Forte Investments Ltd. v. Amanda [1964] Ch. 240 cited in Gower, Company Law, 447.
 Giasuddin Ahmed v. Green Delta Insurance Company Ltd. and another 56 DLR (AD) 31.
 Ahmed Impex (Private) Ltd. & others v. Moqbul Ahmed and others 56 DLR (AD) 92.
 Matiur Rahman (Md) v. Dhaka Stock Exchange Ltd. and another 51 DLR 530.
 Black v. Homersham (1878) 4 Ex. D. 24 cited in Morse, Company Law, 252.
Published
2017-02-11
How to Cite
RAFIQUE, Zahid. RETHINKING OF RIGHTS AND PROCEDURAL COMPLEXITY IN TRANSFER OF SHARE: A REVIEW UNDER COMPANY LAW IN BANGLADESH. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics, [S.l.], v. 2, n. 1, p. 60-77, feb. 2017. ISSN 2068-696X. Available at: <https://journals.aserspublishing.eu/jarle/article/view/628>. Date accessed: 23 nov. 2024.
Citation Formats
Issue
Vol 2 No 1 (2011): JARLE Volume 1 Issue 1(3) Summer 2011
Section
Articles

Keywords

transfer of share, Companies Act 1994, pre-emption, refusal, director

The Copyright Transfer Form to ASERS Publishing (The Publisher)
This form refers to the manuscript, which an author(s) was accepted for publication and was signed by all the authors.
The undersigned Author(s) of the above-mentioned Paper here transfer any and all copyright-rights in and to The Paper to The Publisher. The Author(s) warrants that The Paper is based on their original work and that the undersigned has the power and authority to make and execute this assignment. It is the author's responsibility to obtain written permission to quote material that has been previously published in any form. The Publisher recognizes the retained rights noted below and grants to the above authors and employers for whom the work performed royalty-free permission to reuse their materials below. Authors may reuse all or portions of the above Paper in other works, excepting the publication of the paper in the same form. Authors may reproduce or authorize others to reproduce the above Paper for the Author's personal use or for internal company use, provided that the source and The Publisher copyright notice are mentioned, that the copies are not used in any way that implies The Publisher endorsement of a product or service of an employer, and that the copies are not offered for sale as such. Authors are permitted to grant third party requests for reprinting, republishing or other types of reuse. The Authors may make limited distribution of all or portions of the above Paper prior to publication if they inform The Publisher of the nature and extent of such limited distribution prior there to. Authors retain all proprietary rights in any process, procedure, or article of manufacture described in The Paper. This agreement becomes null and void if and only if the above paper is not accepted and published by The Publisher, or is with drawn by the author(s) before acceptance by the Publisher.